NY-LON

This is as it's producers describe: cool with a capital "C". It helps that the entire cast are beautiful, especially Edie, and the two lead roles are played by very talented actors who clearly have a long and successful road ahead of them. I guess this is not aimed at a 30-something audience, but I am enjoying it nonetheless.

It's a really a joy to see the use of split-screen, largely pioneered by Kiefer Sutherland's '24', and I really enjoy watching events from a number of different characters' points of view.

The settings of the grungy second-hand NY record store, Michael's docklands loft apartment, Edie's tiny boho NY.flat and the impersonal environment of Michael's overcrowded open-plan City office are all very well thought-out. The character development is also very intelligently planned. I am only onto the third episode, the plot is a bit thin so far, but I have been drawn-in and I hope that it develops with greater depth and complexity over the rest of the series.

This fascinating piece of television drama reflects the reality of the fact that the world is getting smaller and affairs of the heart are increasingly spanning the globe and there's no stopping it. It also speaks volumes about the need for innovative and creative direction and camera work which can grab the attention of an increasingly critical audience.

Thoroughly enjoyable, well acted, well written; however, didn't amount to what it could have.

The production seemed to be a bit mismanaged, never really getting its legs despite strong and true performances from the cast and an intelligently written script. The show suffered the fate of too many cooks in the kitchen, where it needed a single style, single direction. For example, the split-screen effect was not altogether a bad idea, but it was rarely used for any real benefit. Likewise, there were story ideas that were never fully sussed out. In the end it looked like a jumbled product of three directors who could have benefited greatly from a single executive producer's vision.

Still, it was one of the better programs of 2004, it just hurts to see so much effort and such talent amount to an "almost".

Charming leads, interesting location shoots, and a boppy soundtrack make for a pretty mini-series, but one lacking in much backbone or substance.

The production hinges on the two leads: Edie, the poor but lovable social-worker-record-store-worker, and Michael, the bad-boy-banker-with-a-heart-of-gold. Yes, they are types and stock characters. They meet by chance when Edie visits London and needs to borrow some money from a bloke in a pub. He gets her number, and the hijinks ensue.

They begin a tentative transatlantic romance, with complications of former lovers, jobs, friends and family, as well as their own cautious natures, standing in the way of True Love.

So should you spend 7 hours watching this series? I was utterly charmed, but recognize some drawbacks: wooden dialogue (and acting), silly situations worthy of a bedroom farce (mistaken identities and the like), and a lack of realism (how does poor Edie manage to buy those tickets to London? Guess she has good credit!)

I chalk up my enjoyment of the series to the leads, especially to Stephen Moyer, who brings an edge and a sly wit to Michael. Despite tragically misguided sideburns, he is a strong presence, and manages to overcome the limitations of the dialogue and trite situations.

Rashida Jones fares less well. She is certainly beautiful (Peggy Lipton + the "Q" = gorgeous), but is more shaky in her command of the character and dialogue. I haven't seen Ms. Jones in other roles, so no harm, no foul. I'm not sure how many actors could pull this character off. All I can say is I enjoyed watching her struggle, and she did OK with a tough assignment.

The last characters worth mentioning are the cities of London and New York. Nicely done exterior shots provide more realism than the story itself. Add in great soundtrack, and I was happily diverted.

I don't have an awful lot to say about this sorry romantic drama.

A hugely uninteresting story about a transatlantic romance between two very dull characters.

Edie is a hard-up yank who has been in a relationship with a complete loser. Michael Antonioni (yes, MICHAEL ANTONIONI) is a hard-working, hard-living obscenely well-paid Brit with a heart of gold under the tough exterior.

I don't want to be too hard on this fella cos he really is a nice chap (no really, he is) but for a guy in a dynamic, highly paid job where image counts for so much it was something of a mystery why he always wore the same suit that was at least one size too small for him....

To be honest, from what I saw (because I gave up after episode 4) Rashida Jones was OK as Edie but Stephen Moyer was uncharismatic and simply dreadful as MICHAEL ANTONIONI.

Some people may admire split-screen drama but ever since watching The Andromeda Strain and The Boston Strangler ages ago, I have always felt that the use of the split-screen is simply a flashy tool with the sole purpose of glossing over a director's inability to edit scenes into a coherent story.

Ny-Lon used the split screen a great deal and I found this incredibly annoying.

The romance between the two lead characters fails to convince purely because there is no chemistry at all between the actors leaving viewers totally disinterested in the supposed drama of their love life.

Worst of all was the embarrassing reference to Italian art-house cinema in the characters names of MICHAEL ANTONIONI and his nephew ANGELO.

I was almost expecting Michael's chums Frederick Fellini, Bernard Bertolucci, Luke Visconti and Peter Pasolini to be introduced at some point.

Thankfully this did not happen, at least not in the first four episodes...

...though that's about as far as it goes for this series. The whole program just seemed to scream that the makers desperately wanted it to be the hippest creation EVER and oh-so-cool but the result was flat, anti- drama with little to recommend it. The acting was passable though certainly not electric by any means. Production valued were generally good but the script just tried too hard to be daring and shocking but it's core ended up coming across as simply tepid, lacking in substance and with a negative moral outlook some of the time. I didn't see the whole series, admittedly, but when something starts to simply bore the pants off you there is nothing much left to do but put this series of the shelf and file it under 'dull'.